ArticlePeerJ2024
Content quality and reliablity of YouTube™ videos as a source of information about good oral hygiene practices in adults.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluating pulpitis-related content on Chinese social media: platform comparison, dental practitioner impact and associated factors.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Quality and guideline adherence of child-oriented toothbrushing videos on YouTube: a comparative study of Turkish and English content.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Quality, reliability, and content completeness of Chinese-language short videos on impacted wisdom teeth on TikTok and Bilibili: a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Article
- Quality, usefulness, reliability, and accuracy of YouTube™ information on dental visits for children with autism: a cross-sectional study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Quality Assessment of Videos about Radiotherapy-Related Oral Mucositis on YouTube in Brazil.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025Article
- Early prevention from the first tooth - what do German dental homepages recommend?BMC oral health · 2025Article
- The quality and reliability of YouTube video content about gingival recession on different time periods.PeerJ · 2025Article
- YouTube as an information source in deep margin elevation: Reliability, accuracy and quality analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
- Are videos uploaded by dental professionals on lip repositioning surgery of higher quality? A youtube video analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
- Self-Reported Oral Hygiene Performance of Patients in Albania: A Questionnaire-Based Survey.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- Quality assessment of YouTube™ videos on gingival recession and its management: A cross-sectional analysis of content reliability and educational value.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Good oral hygiene is crucial for preventing dental caries and periodontal diseases. However, proper and regular application of oral hygiene practices requires adequate knowledge. In recent years, the internet has become one of the most popular places to find health-related information, necessitating studies that analyze the quality of the content available online. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the content quality and reliability of YouTube™ videos on the topic of adult oral hygiene practices and to guide oral health care professionals who use this platform for patient education. Methods: A YouTube™ search was performed of the most frequent search term, 'dental hygiene'. A total of 150 videos were screened, and 51 were included in the final study. The characteristics, sources, and content of the videos were analyzed using the Global Quality Score (GQS) and DISCERN reliability indices. The IBM SPSS 25 program was used for statistical analyses. Results: Most of the included videos were uploaded by oral health care professionals (63%). GQS revealed only 17.6% of the videos were excellent quality whereas 23.5% of them were poor quality. In the content analysis, 62.7% of the videos were deemed moderately useful. Video duration, total content score, and interaction indices were all significantly higher in the useful and very useful groups compared to the slightly useful group ( Conclusion: The study concluded that most YouTube™ videos on oral hygiene practices for adults are moderately useful. When using YouTube™ for patient education, oral health care professionals and organizations should be aware of low-quality videos and seek out accurate, useful videos. There is also a need for quality videos with expanded oral health content.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.